Worth noting from the article:
> The verdict required American Seafoods and its subsidiaries to find a new way to ship seafood into the United States, bringing the Bayside Canadian Railway's usefulness to an end.
It looks like the "railway" owner solved the problem by switching to Russian-sourced seafood (Jones act applies to shipments between US ports): https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cbp-bayside-canad...
I liked this short video from "Half as interesting" on Youtube on the railway itself if you're looking for a video on the subject.
The Jones Act needs to be abolished, or limited to only apply to the contiguous US.
>The law requires shipping between American ports to be handled by American-built, American-flagged vessels
Sounds anti competitive and not really like a free market. China vibes.
I am trying to find the judge's ruling. If I go to the District Court of Alaska, they want me to register for a PACER account and pay up to $3 a document.
In my Google, I did find an interesting Yale Law Journal [1] article that mentioned this case, that when on to say that repealing the Jones Act is basically DOA due to lobbying interests.
[1] The Yale Law Journal https://www.yalelawjournal.org The Neglected Port Preference Clause and the Jones Act
> Its operator was lucky not to be fined $350 million
If the courts actually want to discourage this behaviour, they should have levied the fine
Why are we calling the railroad absurd and not the Jones Act?
Isn't the Jones Act the same act that has to be waived every time Puerto Rico needs aid?
Sounds like a terrible legacy law that needs to be reworked.